First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Replacement Dispensation

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

:

HAV/00HC/LDC/2025/0744

Property

:

43 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

[COMPANY]

:

[NAME] Ms [COUNSEL]

Respondents

:

[redacted] Mr [COUNSEL]

: None

Type of Application

:

To dispense with the statutory consultation requirements to consult lessees about major works, section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

Tribunal Members

:

Mr [APPELLANT] [NAME] Mr [NAME] F [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Decision

:

2 December 2025

DECISION

2 The Decision

1. The Tribunal grants the application for dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘‘the 1985 Act’’) from the statutory consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by section 20 of the 1985 Act in respect of the qualifying works being the replacement of the roof at the property required to stop the ongoing water ingress into the building which has created a serious health and safety concern as the leaks are damaging the structure and the interior.

2. This Decision does not affect the Tribunal’s jurisdiction upon any future application from the [NAME] to make a determination under section 27A of the 1985 Act in respect of the reasonableness and/or cost(s) associated with the qualifying works proposed.

Background and the Application

3. The Applicant seeks dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘‘the 1985 Act’’) from the statutory consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by section 20 of the 1985 Act in respect of qualifying works to replace the roof at the property. The application is dated 23 October 2025.

4. The property is described as a Victorian building converted into four separate flats, comprising 1-2 bedrooms, having been built circa 1860.

5. The Applicant describes the qualifying works at 6.5, ‘Urgent roof replacement (and redecoration of the facias on the roof). The existing roof has deteriorated significantly and is now leaking, which is causing ongoing water ingress in the building. This is creating a serious health and safety concern, as the leaks are damaging the structure and interior, increasing the risk of damp and further deterioration if not addressed immediately.’

6. The Applicant goes on to describe the consultation that has been carried out hither to, ‘[NAME] have confirmed that the roof has been worsening for a number of years. We have recently taken over management and are keen to restore it. An EGM was held on 18th September 2025, with the [NAME]. 4 quotes were obtained and discussed, the process has been explained at the meeting along with in writing. [NAME] have all agreed to the works and have chosen collectively which quote they would like to proceed with (which is the cheapest) [sic].’

7. The Applicant explains, ‘Dispensation is sought as the roof is leaking and poses a health and safety concern. There have been [NAME] temporary fixes completed on the roof by the [NAME] [NAME] agent, and the roofers have advised that there is no more temporary repairs

3 they can complete. Waiting to complete the full consultation process risks further damage and harm to the residents as the roof would not survive another winter (as advised by roofers who have conducted the temporary repairs). We have kept [NAME] informed, held an EGM and shared 4 quotes, but urgent works are needed so the process can not be…[sic]’.

8. At Annex 1 of the application, the Applicant reaffirms the dispensation sought from the consultation requirements to allow for the urgent replacement of the roof. The Applicant confirms the [NAME] have been aware of the problems with the roof for several years during which a number of temporary repairs have been carried out. The [NAME] were informed the section 20ZA process was to be implemented and an EGM of the lessees was held to discuss the works required. Four quotations were obtained from qualified roofing contractors, the details of which were shared with the [NAME]. The [NAME] have collectively agreed to proceed with the lowest quote.

9. The Applicant concludes to say dispensation is sought from the full section 20 consultation requirements due to the urgent need to replace the roof. The replacement of the roof is required to protect the structure of the building, the interior of the same, and the health and safety of its occupants.

10. The Tribunal gave Directions (‘the Directions’) on 28 October 2025 listing the steps to be taken by the parties in preparation for the determination of the application.

11. The Directions stated the Tribunal would determine the application on the papers without a hearing in accordance with Rule 31 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 unless a party objected in writing to the Tribunal within 14 days of the receipt of these Directions.

12. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application is neither about the proposed costs of the works, nor whether they are recoverable from the [NAME] as services charges, nor the possible application or effect of the Building Safety Act 2022. The [NAME] have the right to make a separate application to the Tribunal under section 27A of the 1985 Act to determine the reasonableness of the costs, and their respective contributions payable through the service charge provisions in their leases.

The Law

13. Section 20 of the 1985 Act and the related Regulations provide that where [NAME] undertakes qualifying works with a cost of more than £250 per lease per 12 month period, the relevant contribution of each

4 [NAME] (jointly where more than one under any given lease) will be [COMPANY] to that sum per annum unless the required consultation processes have been undertaken or the requirement has been dispensed with by the Tribunal. An application to the Tribunal may be made retrospectively.

14. The relevant section of the 1985 Act reads as follows:

S.20 ZA (1) Consultation requirements: supplementary Where an application is made to [the appropriate tribunal] for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements.

15. In [COMPANY] v [NAME] and Others [2013] UKSC 14, the Supreme Court set out certain principles relevant to section 20ZA. Lord [NAME], having clarified that the purpose of sections 19 to 20ZA of the 1985 Act was to ensure that tenants are protected from paying for inappropriate works and paying more than would be appropriate, went on to state ‘’it seems to me that the issue on which the [tribunal] should focus when entertaining an application by a landlord under section 20ZA(1) must be the extent, if any, to which the tenants were prejudiced in either respect by the failure of the landlord to comply with the requirements’’.

16. Furthermore, and following [NAME] v [NAME], the Tribunal has power to grant dispensation on terms.

Consideration and Decision

17. The Tribunal first considered whether it felt able to decide this application reasonably and fairly based on the papers submitted only, with no oral hearing. Having read and considered the papers and given that the application remained unchallenged the Tribunal decided it could do so.

18. The Directions state, paragraph 14, ‘The application and supporting documents shall stand as the Applicant’s case’.

19. In its application, the Applicant states the case is appropriate to be dealt with on the Fast Track basis and goes on to say, ‘The roof’s condition is rapidly deteriorating with winter approaching, the roof would not withstand another season. Delaying works could result in significant structural damage, along with increasing the costs associated with resolving the roof, along with an increased health and safety risk to residents.’

20. The Directions attached a reply form for the Respondents with a date for it to have been completed and to have been returned by to the Applicant to confirm whether the Respondents: [redacted]

5 application, or not; and (2) similarly agreed the Tribunal may decide the matter on the basis of written representations only (no hearing), or not.

21. The Directions include provisions in the event the Respondents oppose the application.

22. Thereafter the Directions give the date by which the Applicant is to confirm to the Tribunal that no objections have been received from the Respondents, if applicable, being 18 November 2025.

23. The bundle includes an email from Ms [NAME] to the Tribunal dated 17 November 2025, to confirm no objections to the application have been received.

24. In addition the bundle includes, inter alia: (1) various email correspondence to confirm all the [NAME] have been kept informed, (2) a copy of the Minutes of the EGM on 18 September 2025, and (3) confirmation that the [NAME] agree to proceed with BNB Roofing’s quote, which is the lowest of the four quotes received for the proposed works.

25. The reasons why retrospective dispensation from the consultation requirements of the 1985 Act is sought by the Applicant is to allow for the urgent replacement of the roof at the property due to its state of disrepair. In consequence, there is ongoing water ingress. Temporary repairs have reached their limit, and the structure will not stand another winter. The Tribunal understands the condition of the roof presents a health and safety risk to the occupants.

26. The Applicant has confirmed all the [NAME] have been informed as to the requirements, have held an EGM and all agree to the courses of action taken hither to. The [NAME] agree which of the roofing contractors is to be engaged for the works.

27. The Tribunal is satisfied the replacement of the roof is urgent in nature and potential delay is likely to lead to further damage to the structure and the interior of the property. The roof in its current condition will continue to present a health and safety risk to the occupants.

28. Taking all the above into consideration and Ms [NAME] having confirmed that no objections to the application have been received from the respondents, coupled with none of the same having asserted that any prejudice would be caused to them, the Tribunal consequently finds that it is reasonable for the Applicant to be granted dispensation with the consultation requirements under the 1985 Act in respect of the qualifying works required, being the replacement of the roof, to stop the ongoing water ingress to protect the structure and interior of the property, and to address the health and safety risk to the occupants.

6 29. Thus, the Tribunal grants the application from 43 [COMPANY] dated 23 October 2025 for dispensation under section 20ZA of the 1985 Act from the statutory consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by the same.

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

30. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making a written application by email to [EMAIL] to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case. All communications must clearly state the Case Number and the address(s) of the premises.

31. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

32. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 days’ time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 days’ time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

33. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking.